DECEMBER 12, 2008 | ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI

1. Attitudes Towards Higher Education Among Missouri Voters and Business Leaders DECEMBER 12, 2008 | ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI

2. Research Objectives    Obtain a baseline measure of stakeholder perceptions of the UM System in general, as well as attitudes concerning the importance of higher education specifically Identify messages that are likely to have the greatest ability to “move the needle” and impact opinions of the university and higher education funding From a demographic perspective, better understand where support for the university is the strongest and where it is the weakest

3. Methodology: Statewide Survey • Adams Gabbert and Associates • Anheuser-Busch • Bank of America - Missouri • Bernstein-Rein • Best Harvest Bakeries • Blue Valley Bank • Covidien • ECCO Select • Edward Jones • Evolve24 • Hallmark • Infinium • KCPT-TV • Kwame Building Group • Lebanon Publishing Co • Lockton Companies, LLC • Strong, Garner, Bauer • Truman Medical Center • VML • Civic Council of Greater Kansas City • Danforth Plant Science Center • Focus St. Louis • Greater KC Chamber of Commerce • Missouri Chamber of Commerce • Office of the St. Louis County Executive Methodology: Executive Interviews • Field dates: September 2008 • Method: Telephone interviews • Average interview length: 21 minutes • Sample: 920 registered voters 30+ years of age throughout the state • Margin of error: ±3.3% • Other notes: • Interview quotas were set for region and gender • Final results were weighted by age and race • Split sample design was used for several questions • Field dates: October – November 2008 • Method: In-depth telephone interviews • Average interview length: 30 minutes • Sample: 25 “C-level” business executives and community leaders throughout the state 3

4. STATEWIDE public opinion survey

5. Key Takeaways • Economic issues dominate the political landscape in the state.  • In fact, the research finds that linking public higher education to an educated workforce and better economic development strongly resonates with voters and helps them understand the benefit they get from the state’s investment in public higher education. • This survey reveals the key communications challenge facing the university: Although only about half understand the value created by higher education, survey participants become more motivated to support the university when informed that Missouri ranks 47th out of 50 in per capita spending on higher education. • Nearly three-fourths (73%) of Missouri’s electorate supports investing more in public higher education even if it means higher taxes or cuts to other programs.

6. Which issues would you say are the most important for our state government to address? [Split sample: version A (n=457)] #3

7. Which issues would you say are the most important for our state government to address? [Split sample: version B (n=463)] #4

8. Do you think Missourians are getting significant benefit for the tax dollars being spent on public higher education? [Split sample: version A (n=457)] Do you think Missourians are getting a good return for the tax dollars being spent on public higher education? [Split sample: version B (n=463)]

9. Why do you feel the tax dollars being spent on public higher education are a good investment? [open-ended]

10. To what extent does this information make you more likely to want to support the University of Missouri System? (n=920) [Positive messages that were most compelling] Healthcare Economy Healthcare Educational opportunities

11. To what extent does this information make you more likely to want to support the University of Missouri System? (n=920) [Positive messages that were somewhat compelling] Educational and research opportunities Research Extension programs Employment opportunities and taxes

12. To what extent does this information make you more likely to want to support the University of Missouri System? (n=920) [Positive messages that were less compelling] Quantity of degrees awarded Sharing research Land-grant university

13. To what extent does this information make you more likely to want to support the University of Missouri System? (n=920) [Negative messages] Health professional shortage Spending on higher education Economic development Faculty salaries Funding for repairs

14. Which of these viewpoints comes closest to your own? (n=920)

15. Which of these two viewpoints comes closest to your own? (n=920)

16. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following messages about the University of Missouri System? (n=920)

17. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? [Asked of only those who have children under 18; n=247]

18. EXECUTIVE interviews

19. The importance of higher education • Business leaders get it – they don’t need to be convinced that public higher education is important. • They acknowledge that the situation is complex when you’re dealing with limited resources and the reality that trade-offs of some sort are necessary. • Tough to say public higher education is the #1 priority, but it’s up there. • Some argue that it shouldn’t be about a trade-off, and the state simply needs to make it a priority and invest. • “There’s a difference between being broke and cheap, and Missouri is just cheap…you cannot cost-cut your way to prosperity.” • Why do they get it? • Most business leaders immediately tie higher education to economic development opportunities. • “It fuels the intellectual capital to run our enterprises.” • “Workforce availability is one of the most important factors in economic development” • “If the University of Missouri is going to be a player, it has to embrace a kind of holistic approach. What’s its role in our community as a whole as opposed to it’s just about higher education?” • “It’s a high priority that would demonstrate the commitment of the state to a high tech future. For a knowledge-based economy in the future, it is the ground on which any new innovation which will lead to economic growth and development in the state.”

20. What the business community wants to hear • Economic development messages… • “We spur economic development.” • “We’ve got technical expertise that can benefit the statewide economy.” • “We’re graduating a large number of people who are qualified to make a contribution on day one.” • “We are your business partner.” • “Students are ready when they leave that institution to be a major contributor to their business…” • “We are preparing Missouri’s workforce for tomorrow.” • But also messages that focus on quality… • “Our graduates are among the best in the country” • “The research being done by its academic leaders are uncovering new principles and areas of thought that will help business push forward into new frontiers.” • “It offers quality education at a reasonable price.” • “What is your standing in the rankings? How does your quality rank compare nationally?” • “It is a high quality product pushing out high quality people.”

21. Key Takeaways from the Executive Interviews • The in-depth, qualitative interviews that were conducted with business and community leaders generated results that were generally similar to the voter survey, but perhaps with some great intensity in some areas. • Business leaders “get it” – most immediately draw a link between higher education and economic development. This group does not need to be convinced that public higher education is important. • However, several individuals commented that “economic development” should not be the only message. The “quality of our education” is also a critically important component (especially to business leaders outside the state that might be interested in relocating or expanding in Missouri). • Healthcare focused messages are not as obvious, but seem to be very powerful when business leaders learn about the university’s role in this field. • The “falling behind” messages (e.g., the state ranks 47th in per capita spending on public higher education) frames the issue in a more competitive context that gets people a bit fired up. They simply find many of these statistics to be unacceptable for the state.

22. Research study managed by: William Stewart Senior Vice President and Partner Director of Research Fleishman-Hillard 200 N Broadway St. Louis, MO 63102 (314) 982-1700